The midtrial immigration arrest of a Dominican national during his Massachusetts court case has raised tensions between federal and state prosecutors and threatens to injure cooperation between the offices, experts say.

The arrest of Wilson Martell-Lebron, 52, outside the Boston Municipal Court prompted a state judge to dismiss his felony case, convene hearings over what police and prosecutors in the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office knew and when, and hold the arresting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in contempt. That ruling was immediately challenged by the U.S. attorney for Massachusetts, who called it a "damaging state intrusion into federal functions."

Experts told Law360 they doubt the arrest was designed to antagonize the court and attorneys involved, or otherwise prompt the same kind of response that resulted in federal prosecutors charging a state court judge with obstruction in 2019 for helping a defendant leave her courtroom out a back door while federal agents waited to detain him.

Still, they said the dispute could undermine what has traditionally been a productive relationship between federal and state prosecutors, who often work together on cases ranging from drug and gang prosecutions to major fraud investigations. It comes at a time of heightened tensions among local leaders nationwide over the Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement efforts.

"The danger of asserting federal power too heavy-handedly is you risk jeopardizing some of those other relationships," said Jeffrey Cohen, a former federal prosecutor and current assistant professor at Boston College Law School.

Cohen, who served as a Boston federal prosecutor from 2004 to 2012, said state-level cooperation was instrumental in the civil and criminal false claims prosecutions related to the "Big Dig" highway construction project in Boston as well as in the search and arrest of mobster White Bulger.

Calling Martell-Lebron's arrest an "unfortunate exertion of federal power," Cohen said the move would prove "not worth it if it's going to harm the larger, broader relationship with state law enforcement."

The rapport, at least in public, started to fray almost immediately.

Martell-Lebron, 49, was facing felony charges alleging he provided false identification on a license application. He was arrested at the end of the trial day on March 28.

Boston Municipal Court Judge Mark H. Summerville dismissed the case and held ICE agent Brian Sullivan in contempt. The next day, Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden held a press conference defending his office's handling of the case and denouncing the effect that federal immigration enforcement was having on public safety in Boston.

Hayden pledged his office would "raise up a standard" against anyone interfering with the office's ability to hold offenders accountable and ensure public safety.

"We will not stand silent while ICE removes defendants in the middle of a trial," Hayden said. "We will not stand silent when the fear of ICE stops victims and witnesses from coming forward. We will not stand silent while ICE operations jeopardize the public safety gains we and our partners have worked so long and so hard to achieve."

His office has not said whether it will charge Sullivan with criminal contempt.

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney Leah B. Foley asked a federal judge on April 2 to vacate the contempt finding, saying the state court judge lacked "any authority whatsoever" to proceed in the case against Sullivan or any other officer who makes an immigration arrest in court.

"Any attempt or threat to interfere with the lawful functions of federal government agents will not be tolerated," Foley wrote in a letter.

A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney's office declined to comment.

During the first Trump administration, the fight between state and federal officials came to a head when the Massachusetts U.S. attorney's office indicted Judge Shelley Joseph for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade ICE agents.

B. Stephanie Siegmann, a former federal prosecutor and national security chief in the Boston office, acknowledged the sharp disagreement between the state and federal points of view on the Judge Joseph case, but said the differences of opinion were mostly siloed to the higher-ups whose mission is somewhat politically charged.

"Our office decided it was important to send a message that this was unacceptable, and it would not be tolerated. That was the decision that was made," said Siegmann, now a partner at Hinckley Allen LLP. "If it impacted anything, it impacted the relationship between the most senior people in those offices."

But the assistant U.S. attorneys and state prosecutors continued to do their respective jobs, and Siegmann said she saw strong cooperation in a wide range of areas, including national security cases and drug crimes.

"There was some frustration, and there might be disagreements on certain things," Siegmann added. "But the priority was always to work together."

Judge Joseph's attorney, Thomas M. Hoopes of Libby Hoopes Brooks & Mulvey PC, has predicted that another case like hers is possible during Trump's second term, and said he wasn't surprised by Foley's comments.

"Candidly, I don't think she has got much choice. This is her president, she is there to enforce his policies, so of course she is going to say that kind of stuff," Hoopes said, adding that Foley isn't the type to seek out media attention.

He added: "If the current U.S. attorney and people like her avoid unfounded, reckless, and political prosecutions" — the same descriptors Hoopes applies to the Judge Joseph case — "we will all get through it."

The indictment against Judge Joseph was ultimately dismissed, although a judicial misconduct case is pending.

Siegmann noted that Hayden, as an elected official, may have felt compelled to take a strong stand to mirror his constituents' views when he blasted the arrest as "troubling and extraordinarily reckless." 

A similar standoff occurred around the time of Judge Joseph's arrest. Then-Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins and Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement to block the agency from making courthouse arrests.

A federal judge in June 2019 issued a preliminary injunction that banned immigration agents from arresting people in or around courthouses. The First Circuit overturned that decision months later, and the local prosecutors dropped their case when President Joe Biden's administration shifted policy and limited courthouse arrests.

The state of play in courts for the moment appears to be adjusting to the reality that ICE agents are there "waiting and watching," said Victor Hansen of New England Law, a professor and former prosecutor in the U.S. Army's Judge Advocate General's Corps.

He said he's heard of defense attorneys and prosecutors, in some cases, coordinating and agreeing to have defendants held on bond so ICE can avoid a courthouse arrest and pick up the person later from jail.

Prosecutors like Hayden should focus on the cases in front of them and avoid coordination with ICE, Hansen said.

"Hayden is a smart guy," Hansen said. "He is not going to run afoul of the law, I can't imagine that happening. It's going to be one of those things where it's always at a low boil and every day in court there is the potential for something disruptive like this to happen."

--Editing by Linda Voorhis.